SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(AP) 1002

B.SUDERSHAN REDDY, P.S.NARAYANA
Union of India rep. by its Secretary, ministry of Defence, New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
S. M. Hussain Rasheed – Respondent


B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS batch of writ appeals as well as the writ petition may be disposed of by a common judgment, since common questions of law and facts arise for consideration between the same parties.

( 2 ) W. A. NO. 936 of 1999 is filed by the union of India and others against the order dated 26-4-1999 made in W. P. No. 9381 of 1994 by a learned single Judge of this Court, whereas W. A. Nos. 890 and 1407 of 2001 are filed against the order dated 19-4-2001 made by a learned single Judge of this Court in w. P. No. 12124 of 2000, by the Executive officer, Secunderabad Cantonment Board and Defence Estate Officer, A. P. Circle, secunderabad respectively.

( 3 ) W. P. NO. 801 of 2003 is interconnected and, therefore, the same is also taken up for disposal along with these writ appeals. W. A. No. 936 of 1999:

( 4 ) THAT one S. M. Hussain Rasheed (hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner ) filed W. P. No. 9381 of 1994, out of which W. A. No. 936 of 1999 has arisen, challenging the action of Union of India in holding that the ownership of the land on which Bungalow No. 219 is situated rests with the Government. It would be just and necessary to notice the prayer in the s






























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top